Blu-ray or HD-DVD

[EVO_9MR]

console war aside, which would you prefer.
Blu-ray holds much more data but HD-DVD can be made more cheaply and display just as good on the screen.

[Liberator13]

If money is not an issue in any sense, get Blu-Ray.

If not, HD-DVD is definitely the way to go.

[usefulidiot316]

I'd rather have HD-DVD because it's a little further ahead in terms of tech. BluRay, for instance, just recently caught up with HD-DVDs Flash technology that let 300 have PiP in HD-DVD only.

Disk size is not important. With compression, you can fit an entire HD movie in 720p on a single layer DVD, 1080p on a dual layer. The extra space is for the extra features no one ever uses.

[dialamo]

If you really feel like adopting a HD format this early, the clear choice is Blu-ray.

More studio support, more space, higher bit-rates, has clear dominance in the PC/storage sector with its BD burners, and it's selling better all around.

Saying space is a nonfactor is outrageous. Imaging trying to fit one of the three parts of Lord of the Rings on a HD DVD (max space ~30GB), the movie will either have to be split on two disc's or the quality has to be significantly lowered to fit on a single disc. Totally unacceptable. A 50GB blu-ray can fit it without needing to sacrifice PQ/AQ. Compression is a word that should NEVER be mentioned when producing high definition media.

Only advantages I see for HD DVD are:
1. It already has full specs. (PiP, internet connectivity, etc...)
2. It's deal with Paramount/Dreamworks to be HD DVD exclusive for 18 months.

It may seem like a good idea at first to buy HD DVD since it's so cheap now, but with Blu-ray having dominace in sales, it's larger studio support, and the ever growing rumors that Warner Bros may go Blu-ray only, that $98 Toshiba A2 you purchased may become a betamax soon.

I know I seem to be really one sided on this topic, but with some the facts I posted, I don't really see a reason to buy a HD DVD player unless if you are a real HDM fanatic and have enough money to go format neutral to not wait for the movies released on HD DVD only to be released on Blu-ray later.

I'm format neutral, owning about 70 BD's and about 10 HD DVD's, because I'm an impatient bastard, but trust me on this one, Blu-ray is the way to go.

[phoenix009]

Er how is this video game related? I also would pick Blu-Ray for the above reasons, plus the discs are more durable and it has uncompressed 7.1 audio as far as I know.

[Burnt Socks]

Combo player. Buying anything else at this point would be a waste of good money.

[usefulidiot316]

If you really feel like adopting a HD format this early, the clear choice is Blu-ray.

More studio support, more space, higher bit-rates, has clear dominance in the PC/storage sector with its BD burners, and it's selling better all around.

Saying space is a nonfactor is outrageous. Imaging trying to fit one of the three parts of Lord of the Rings on a HD DVD (max space ~30GB), the movie will either have to be split on two disc's or the quality has to be significantly lowered to fit on a single disc. Totally unacceptable. A 50GB blu-ray can fit it without needing to sacrifice PQ/AQ. Compression is a word that should NEVER be mentioned when producing high definition media.

Only advantages I see for HD DVD are:
1. It already has full specs. (PiP, internet connectivity, etc...)
2. It's deal with Paramount/Dreamworks to be HD DVD exclusive for 18 months.

It may seem like a good idea at first to buy HD DVD since it's so cheap now, but with Blu-ray having dominace in sales, it's larger studio support, and the ever growing rumors that Warner Bros may go Blu-ray only, that $98 Toshiba A2 you purchased may become a betamax soon.

I know I seem to be really one sided on this topic, but with some the facts I posted, I don't really see a reason to buy a HD DVD player unless if you are a real HDM fanatic and have enough money to go format neutral to not wait for the movies released on HD DVD only to be released on Blu-ray later.

I'm format neutral, owning about 70 BD's and about 10 HD DVD's, because I'm an impatient bastard, but trust me on this one, Blu-ray is the way to go.


Video compression has been used in digital videos since the first videos appeared on a PC harddrive. Both BluRay and HD-DVD use compression in their formats, the same kind of compression that Microsoft uses for their Xbox Live! video service to make the same video a 4GB download without losing much at all in terms of IQ and AQ. Without any kind of compression at all, a raw HD video in 720p would take up about 500x as much as they do now, or almost 1TB for a normal 90 minute movie.(that's 720x1280[pixels] x24[bits of color] x60[frames per second] x5400[seconds in 90 minutes] /8[the number of bits in 1 byte] =896GB and that's before the .wav format of uncompressed audio over 6 or 8 channels for 90 minutes)

With modern compression rates being used on ANY HD format, it's pretty obvious bitrate and disk size are not factors when having to choose between BluRay and HD-DVD. Other than that, the only two factors that remain are studio support and movie features. The features are useless, because they're always PiP audio commentary, or how how the movie was made, so that point is moot. Studio support is a great feature, but then you have to remember quality over quantity. What's the point of buying into a format that has a bunch of movies, if they're movies you never want to watch? With that, it really comes down to personal opinion over what movies you want to watch.

Either way you go, though, both HD-DVD and BluRay are set to be replaced soon, anyway. With HVD just around the corner, and HD videos being offered by video download services, like Xbox Live! and Netflix, both HD formats are set to go the way of the Laserdisc. WTF is Laserdisc, you ask? It just proves my point, in 5 years, people will be asking, WTF is BluRay?

[melodeathpwns]

Neither, VHS FTW.

[Rapex]

Just get regular DVDs. I've seen Blu Ray and I've seen HD-DVD, but the difference between those two and regular DVD isn't this amazing world-changing difference. I'm fine with regular DVDs.

[Owned]

If I had to guess, Blu-Ray will be the standard in 4 years.

HD DVD kinda seems like PSP format to me atm.

[Kazimierz]

In all of their format wars, Sony made a better, more expensive product.

The cheaper one won. I doubt this will be anything different.

If i was going to buy anything, i'd buy a dual HD-DVD/Blu-Ray Player. That will likely be the solution anyway. I wouldn't pick one or the other, but if i had to, it would be HD-DVD.

[rand0m]

In all of their format wars, Sony made a better, more expensive product.

The Compact Disk excists doesn't it? Yes that was one of Sony's love children.

Probably one of the biggest and most successful formats around, did Sony fuck that one up?

If you have a problem with a Company trying to produce a more competitive, technologically advanced and new format, system or software go back to reading a book.

If company's like Sony didn't competitively fight to get a winning format we would be left with crappy, expensive, useless technology.

Blu-Ray won the HD format months ago, strange closed door-meetings and money transactions have pulled HD-DVD back from the dead. As far a conspiracy theories go, Michael Bay has a point in saying 'Microsoft and other large players don't want any of the formats to win'.

If you want my opinion, don't bother with any format. Blu-Ray were outselling HD-DVD 2:1 in some cases 3:1 etc etc, more PS3's are leaving shelves and more company's were going Blu-Ray exclusive ... then Dreamworks and <other company forgot> suddenly deside to go 'HD-DVD exclusive' after some strange meetings with Microsoft executives ...

That doesn't make any sense in the busincess word, which only supports the thoery that the HD formats are going to be obsolete soon.

[CSPope]

I'm just going to wait until some format for HD movie playback becomes standard. When that happens, I'll buy one.

For now I'll go read some books or just acquire HD movies from the internet if I really want to see one in HD.

[rand0m]

Downloaded movies is the next thing guys.

Shit I havn't watched a DVD for months now, yet some how I've managed to watch alot of movies ... how have i done that?(no dont have tv eather)

Maybe its the 400GiG portable harddrive I have that has over 200 movies all in quality impossible to differentiate from the original DVD ...

[Liberator13]

Downloaded movies is the next thing guys.

Shit I havn't watched a DVD for months now, yet some how I've managed to watch alot of movies ... how have i done that?(no dont have tv eather)

Maybe its the 400GiG portable harddrive I have that has over 200 movies all in quality impossible to differentiate from the original DVD ...

The authorities are on their way.

[Total Madman]

Well my padre' has an HD-DVD player & HD LCD TV, and to be honest he just buys regular dvds because the difference in picture quality between HD and SD really is not as good as all these geeks think it is.

[Kazimierz]

The Compact Disk excists doesn't it? Yes that was one of Sony's love children.

Probably one of the biggest and most successful formats around, did Sony fuck that one up?

There was no format war there. They were competing with the already established cassette.

If you have a problem with a Company trying to produce a more competitive, technologically advanced and new format, system or software go back to reading a book.

Why would i have a problem? I don't care. I don't give a fuck who wins, fanboy, i'm just point out what i see. Calm it down, i'm not teasing your fucking PS3.

Blu-Ray won the HD format months ago, strange closed door-meetings and money transactions have pulled HD-DVD back from the dead. As far a conspiracy theories go, Michael Bay has a point in saying 'Microsoft and other large players don't want any of the formats to win'.

So i guess Blu-Ray didn't win the HD format months ago, then.

If you want my opinion, don't bother with any format. Blu-Ray were outselling HD-DVD 2:1 in some cases 3:1 etc etc, more PS3's are leaving shelves and more company's were going Blu-Ray exclusive ... then Dreamworks and <other company forgot> suddenly deside to go 'HD-DVD exclusive' after some strange meetings with Microsoft executives ...

I said buy dual players, because chances are both will remain. The same kinds of meetings that gave Blu-Ray exclusive rights. Why the fuck is it sinister for HD-DVD to do it, and not Blu-Ray?

[Liberator13]

Because, as you said, he is the most notorious fanboy on this entire forum. He would allow Sony to take over the world as long as they kept making his beloved PS3.

[Osiris5217]

Because, as you said, he is the most notorious fanboy on this entire forum. He would allow Sony to take over the world as long as they kept making his beloved PS3.

He doesn't even own a ps3.

[MexAmercn_Moose]

i don't even think he owns a ps3 yet he still defends them...as previous posters have mentioned, if money weren't a problem then i would buy a blur-ray player, but i would probably buy a player that is compatible with both

[dialamo]

Well my padre' has an HD-DVD player & HD LCD TV, and to be honest he just buys regular dvds because the difference in picture quality between HD and SD really is not as good as all these geeks think it is.
You would be surprised!

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=885362
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=811102
http://www.cornbread.org/FOTRCompare/index.html (Move your mouse over the pictures for the HD pic for this link.)

[Total Madman]

You would be surprised!

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=885362
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=811102
http://www.cornbread.org/FOTRCompare/index.html (Move your mouse over the pictures for the HD pic for this link.)

Those links have further re-affirmed what I said before. It's more of an "Oh, I see" rather than "Holy shit! I'm gonna go steal an HD set!". I just don't think it's worth the extra price tag right now.

[usefulidiot316]

You would be surprised!

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=885362
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=811102
http://www.cornbread.org/FOTRCompare/index.html (Move your mouse over the pictures for the HD pic for this link.)

You know, I wish I could find the link, Anandtech ran some tests comparing upscaled DVD against BluRay and HD-DVD on the PS3 and Xbox360 respectively. Turns out, when you have a newer video card from AMD or Nvidia(doesn't have to be high end, just within the last 2 generations), they upscale it so that it's incredibly hard to tell the difference between SD and HD.

[Osiris5217]

Personally, I choose blu-ray but only because of some comparison images I saw, there was a good quality difference.

[dialamo]

Personally, I choose blu-ray but only because of some comparison images I saw, there was a good quality difference.
To be fair, there is very little difference with Blu-ray picture quality and HD DVD picture quality. I have no idea where you saw comparison photos that show a substantial advantage in picture quality for Blu-ray over HD DVD. The only way you'll see a big difference is when you compare a DVD to a Blu-ray/HD DVD.

The big differences the variety of available movies to buy and prices. Blu-ray players are more expensive, while HD DVD players are cheaper, but Blu-ray movies are cheaper on average than HD DVD movies.

For movies, Blu-ray is supported from these studios:
20th Century Fox
Buena Vista Home Entertainment
MGM Studios
Sony Pictures Entertainment
The Walt Disney Company
Warner Bros. *

HD DVD is supported from these studios:
Paramount Pictures
Universal Studios
Warner Bros. *

*Neutral


I am pretty sure I missed some studios, especially for HD DVD. I can't seem to remember them and I apologize in advance.

[BestNameEver]

they cant even spell 'blue' right, they = fail.

[dialamo]

they cant even spell 'blue' right, they = fail.
Thanks for the lol, dude!

[Well Me]

Where's the 'I couldn't give two shits' option?

[BestNameEver]

Thanks for the lol, dude!

np, but srsly tho, how really good of a picture do you need, they can only GET so good... so the price difference really kind of settles this one.

[CodyTheBowler]

You know, I wish I could find the link, Anandtech ran some tests comparing upscaled DVD against BluRay and HD-DVD on the PS3 and Xbox360 respectively. Turns out, when you have a newer video card from AMD or Nvidia(doesn't have to be high end, just within the last 2 generations), they upscale it so that it's incredibly hard to tell the difference between SD and HD.

side-by-side comparisons or GTFO.

[rand0m]

Can someone please PLEASE PLEASE explain to me why you would want to watch some movies in HD. Aside from Blue Planet and some crazy action movies, why would you want to watch ne thing else in HD?

[Sepharih]

You know, I wish I could find the link, Anandtech ran some tests comparing upscaled DVD against BluRay and HD-DVD on the PS3 and Xbox360 respectively. Turns out, when you have a newer video card from AMD or Nvidia(doesn't have to be high end, just within the last 2 generations), they upscale it so that it's incredibly hard to tell the difference between SD and HD.

Trust me, upscalling looks no where near as good as HD. It will make the image look somewhat crisper, but you can't regain the lost detail that you'll find in HD. If they claim there's no difference, I bet they didn't use an especially great source to judge from. With HD, you also regain more accurate color information due to the advanced codecs they're using as well. Someone posted images of the DVD versus HD Lord of the Rings. See how in SD one shot is completely blown out, while in the HD it isn't?

Can someone please PLEASE PLEASE explain to me why you would want to watch some movies in HD. Aside from Blue Planet and some crazy action movies, why would you want to watch ne thing else in HD?
For the most part, no reason. I see no reason to replace my copies of Reservoir Dogs, Wedding Crashers, Dogma, Life of Brian, etc. I wouldn't mind an HD copy, but it wouldn't be a radically different experience seeing it in HD.
However, I watched the original Die Hard on Blu-ray for the first time in years and enjoyed it immensely in HD. I like watching those movies in HD because the picture looks around 3 times as good (if the transfer is good that is) and because the uncompressed audio sounds fantastic when things go BOOOM!

In any case guys, the whole Blu-ray versus HD-dvd in quality is completely moot right now. The quality of the film has nothing to do with the format in this case, it has to do with the transfer (from the original negative to an HD format).
Here's the problem, Blu-ray does offer more storage capacity and may be the superior format, but as long as they continue to do dual releases, they'll master the transfer for as small as it needs to be so that they can release them on both formats. You can't use exclusive releases to show which is superior either, because that's also a matter of the quality of the source material.
As of right now, anyone who claims to see a higher quality in either format on a dual format release is full of it, because the EXACT same transfer is on both discs.

[Negroponte]

I think that by the time this format war is decided, most people will be downloading/streaming their movies. I already use On Demand for most of my movies, and plenty of people use BitTorrent/Limewire(illegally, whatever).

[kcobain1134]

I think that by the time this format war is decided, most people will be downloading/streaming their movies. I already use On Demand for most of my movies, and plenty of people use BitTorrent/Limewire(illegally, whatever).

10 -15 years off till we go to true downloading HD movies. They are way to big for our system to hold, and our system is growing slower then the amount of poeple joining on.

[evilmittens]

Here are a few facts as known to me.

1) Sony and them not winning cause its more expensive (see Betamax), The blu-ray has a a better shot. In the 1980s Betamax didnt NOT lost cause it was more expensive, it lost cause the pornographic companies went with VHS and at that time that was a little known deal...yet lots of people rented and bought porno...

This time around though, buying porno blu-ray/HD-Dvds is not that huge of a factor since most people perfer to DL them.

2) Costs for blu-ray drives have dropped quite a bit. Some even going for $300.

3)Disney facor, its a huge fucking company and sell a shit ton of movies like Pixar stuff, their own stuff, and huge archieve of movies that everyone seems to buy over and over. They only sell Blu-ray.


My PREDICTION is Blu-ray, but if not its cool.

[rand0m]

Just wait for the downloaded movies.

[A-Mart]

Just wait for the downloaded movies.

If downloads replace discs, they really need to spend a lot of $ developing on-demand technology. The movies I've rented from XBOX LIVE suck as far as options go (subtitles, languages, no extra features, etc)

[rand0m]

If downloads replace discs, they really need to spend a lot of $ developing on-demand technology. The movies I've rented from XBOX LIVE suck as far as options go (subtitles, languages, no extra features, etc)

There is your problem.

I can already get a top quality movies via rapidshare within half an hour, pop it onto my 400 gig external harddrive, plug into tv downstairs, watch.

[Nocturnal]

console war aside, which would you prefer.
Blu-ray holds much more data but HD-DVD can be made more cheaply and display just as good on the screen.

haha, console war aside? good luck with that

Hard media blows, downloads ftw.

[Face Plant]

pornographic companies went with VHS and at that time that was a little known deal...yet lots of people rented and bought porno...

This time around though, buying porno blu-ray/HD-Dvds is not that huge of a factor since most people perfer to DL them.

Good point, porn was the killer ap for vhs, now everyone downloads it